This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I agree.Even in PPR a back like Morris who faces little competition for touches on 1st and 2nd down and is likely to maintain his 290-300 touches for a couple more years is a steal at 1.13. WAS has too many other needs to spend a top 100 pick on a back that will steal touches.
No upside. And don't see how he's winning anything with Morris. Much rather build for future.
And that's a fine strategy, however, Morris can command more than this, especially in-season. This is an absolute sell low. I'd rather trade him for a prospect and future 16 1 to a contender in season that at least has the chance of being something earlier than the 13th pick overall the following year. He has enough picks this year to start the rebuild (if that's what he's trying to do) and think it's sound strategy to try and spread those ones out over multiple drafts.ETA: he could have accomplished same strategy with the 1.13 but I believe to a lesser degree.
But it's not a sell low IMO. No wise owner is parting with more than a late 1st for Morris, if at all. He's just not a good ppr RB. I guess if I were a contender and had a HUGE hole at RB2 in a mandatory two RB league then I might pay that for Morris. But if you're oarting with a late 1st for Morris with numerous holes in your lineup, then you're better off adding a high upside rookie and hoping for the best.
Do we know he has numerous holes in his lineup? I'm on mobile so perhaps I missed him posting his lineup or starting RB requirements? Either way the 2.1 (which is effectively what this is) is a sell low. Last time I checked early 6th round start-up value slotted around the present year 1.8-1.9 value-wise. I'm not paying that but I would certainly expect to find some that would. Value is value to me and honestly I don't even really care that much as to whether I need him or not. If I could acquire him for the 2.1 I'd do it in a heart beat. If I needed him I'd use him if not I'd flip him.
Interesting setup. Never heard of this before. I like how it gets everyone involved a lot earlier than the normal late August draft does. Whats the feedback and how long have you been doing this?Dragon1952 said:
Haven't seen other deals, but 1.13 strikes me as about right for Morris. Even for a contending team, I personally would not pay the 1.13.
since you saw the games can you explain how he led the league in yards and got 33 tds then?
I have an awfully hard time reconciling your post, according to you Graham was a decoy for 11 games and played in five healthy ones yet this coming year that is his ceiling? Your logic is awful. A guy who played hurt most of the season yet put up top 6 numbers at his position, that's a bad thing?
Throwing a ton and being behind in just about every game? Plus he is still very good
Harvin has absolutely nothing to do with graham in any capacity whatsoever.
The locker room stuff for Jimmy seemed to pale in comparison to stories about Harvin and in Harvin's first four season with Minny he missed 8 games, which is 800% more than 1. Minnesota traded Harvin because they wanted rid of him, NO traded Graham because they had let their salary cap become an absolute mess.
Let us count the ways. His stats have steadily gone down for 4 yrs straight almost across the board. Just looking from 2013 to 2014. Total yards down 210 yds, YPG down 13 YPG, TD's down 6, INT's up 5, QB rating down 7.7, games won down 4, yds per pass atempt down 1/2 yd, longest pass play down 7 yds......and the main point I was trying to make about his not being able to fling it like he used to, in 2013 he had 67 pass completions of 20+ yds, in 2014 he only had 52. As that applies to Graham, in 2013 Graham caught 19 of those 20+ yd completions and last year just 8.
I didn't say he was a decoy for 11 games......I said in quite a few he was, when the shoulder was bothering him. I said he only had 5 games where his FP's were comensurate with his status (read ADP, perceived value, however you want to look at it). Seattle gave up a 1st because they believe he can help them move the chains, provide a great red zone target = more TD's = get back to the super bowl.....not necessarily to feature him as the key guy in their offense.
69.5% comp pct weeks 1-16 is pretty good to me.
I don't think you get the point...so his completion % was good, so what...he completed a lot of shorter passes.....so he can still dink and dunk.....let's replace "fling" with "throwing downfield" which he was pretty mediocre at last year. Like I said, if you watch the games you'd know instead of reading the box score. 67 completions over 20 yds down to 52? That's my point when I say he can't fling it like he used to.
You don't pay a first round pick and a very good centre for a chain mover. You pay that for a guy you're going to use commensurately with that price, so yes, necessarily to be the key guy (receiving wise, he's not more important than Lynch) in their offence. Oh and not to mention they are paying him 8, 9 and 10 million the next 3 years. They didn't just pay the expensive price they took on his expensive contract.
http://www.dailynorseman.com/2013/12/2/5168802/the-minnesota-vikings-have-won-the-percy-harvin-trade
I'm really not sure how you can rest a case whose conclusion will be in the future. Do you really think the Seahawks paid that for Harvin planning on him missing the best part of 2 seasons and being a locker room cancer or do you think they thought they'd use his special athletic gifts receiving, rushing and returning? I wasn't aware that NFL teams like to burn first round picks for fun and games (I except the Redskins from that statement).
Very shrewd move for side getting DT
Maybe.
1.05 for me and I'd part with Sanders, possibly 1.06 to 8 depending on draft spots in the NFL draft!
It depends on how you view Sanders as a player. For him to produce the next 5 or 6 years, he's going to have to be good for 4 or 5 years without Peyton. That's a big leap of faith imo.
Yeah, it's not like Demaryius who has been good with anyone under center including Tim Tebow. The non-Peyton quarterback that Sanders played with was another hall of famer and he struggled bigtime. He's unlikely to play with a quarterback better than Ben Roethlisberger after Peyton is gone.
Sanders is 28, Thomas is 27. Sanders isn't putting up last years numbers without Peyton and he surely isn't doing it at age 33 or 34.
Before Sanders played with one of the best QB's of all-time:
From To Draft Tm Lg G GS Tgt Rec Yds Y/R TD Y/G Ctch%Andre Roberts 2010 2013 3-88 CRD NFL 62 35 337 182 2123 11.66 11 34.2 54.0EmmanuelSanders 2010 2013 3-82 PIT NFL 56 18 281 161 2030 12.61 11 36.3 57.3I agree he's good, but subtract Peyton and he probably never hits 1000 yards again.
